It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

You Commit Three Felonies a Day

page: 1
12
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 29 2009 @ 04:15 PM
link   
Yes, you read that right! No wonder the FBI, NSA and DHS monitor everything each and every one of us do! We are all 3x Felons by the time we go to bed each and every night!

Or so Boston civil-liberties lawyer Harvey Silverglat says.

You Commit Three Felonies a Day



This is a common problem in securities laws, which Congress leaves intentionally vague, encouraging regulators and prosecutors to try people even when the law is unclear.

Under the English common law we inherited, a crime requires intent. This protection is disappearing in the U.S. As Mr. Silverglate writes, "Since the New Deal era, Congress has delegated to various administrative agencies the task of writing the regulations," even as "Congress has demonstrated a growing dysfunction in crafting legislation that can in fact be understood." Prosecutors identify defendants to go after instead of finding a law that was broken and figuring out who did it. Expect more such prosecutions as Washington adds regulations.


Despite the obvious question of whether you have had your Federally Recommended Daily Allowance of Felonies today, this brings up a very important point that we often fail to consider...

If you can be proven guilty of a vague Law without having any criminal intent, nor without violating the Spirit of the Law since the Letter of the Law was penned too sweepingly broad, then what recourse do we have?

This has to stop!!!

A government that makes all of it's citizens criminals is not a government of the people, by the people, or for the people and the public interest!

This is yet another reason why the mandate of Congress should be changed to no longer be able to vote upon the Laws which they write! If we allow them to continue to pen the Legislation, then it must be open for public scrutiny and approval, and therefore clear and concise enough to be understood by the layman. Anything less would only continue to this divide between Citizen/Criminal and Lawyer/Government.

[edit on 29-9-2009 by fraterormus]




posted on Sep, 29 2009 @ 04:27 PM
link   
Too much hysteria in the OP. My wife is a lawyer and on many occasions she stated the importance of proven intent in prosecuting/defending the case. The link in the OP represents a few hiccups in the system for sure but these are far from a trend.



posted on Sep, 29 2009 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by fraterormus
 


I share your concern in principle, but ...


Originally posted by fraterormus
This is yet another reason why the mandate of Congress should be changed to no longer be able to vote upon the Laws which they write! If we allow them to continue to pen the Legislation, then it must be open for public scrutiny and approval, and therefore clear and concise enough to be understood by the layman. Anything less would only continue to this divide between Citizen/Criminal and Lawyer/Government.


Wait, are you suggesting we change the constitution to become a direct (referendum) democracy?



posted on Sep, 29 2009 @ 05:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
Too much hysteria in the OP. My wife is a lawyer and on many occasions she stated the importance of proven intent in prosecuting/defending the case. The link in the OP represents a few hiccups in the system for sure but these are far from a trend.


Tell that to Martha Stewart! Or any of the other people that have successfully beaten their cases only to have technicalities uncovered during the case drawn up and prosecuted with severe penalties!

How about OJ? Found Not Guilty, still had to give up millions and all future earnings, and then get the maximum penalty for an admitted set-up! (He may be an azz and deserve it, but that doesn't make it ok to manipulate the law!)

How about the guy in the ATS thread, found Not Guilty of transporting controlled substances, and then have a trumped up charge of abandoning his lab (while he was in jail, and the lab was secured) get him a 2 year sentence!

How about the Florida man that was distributing perfectly legal porn, but is about to serve several years because a myriad of laws were combined and overlapped so that he violated decency standards, and then his other actions became crimes?

How about Rico statutes? Can't get them on one crime, get circumstantial evidence on a bunch of minor violations, package them up and invoke Rico!

How about thing like paraphenalia? Pipe not a crime. But combine it with another misdemeanor possession and it becomes a secondary crime!

How about a legally registered gun, in a legal car, with legal cash won at a casino. Now, when pulled over the overzealous cop violates your rights, trumps up suspicion, searches car, finds cash, continues illegal search, finds weapon, checks cash and like all other US cash it contains trace coc aine, then the gun becomes a felony (even though it was legal a second ago), then the cash and car become property of the state, and you are facing at least two felonies! Now it gets worse because you told the cop that you didn't have any drugs, so you have lied to a police officer, impeded an investigation, and resisted arrest! How about a life sentence for exercising your 2nd amendment and getting a little lucky on the slot machines!



posted on Sep, 29 2009 @ 05:35 PM
link   
reply to post by fraterormus
 


Thanks Frat,

We are indeed a People under siege. Most People choose to ignore the facts, but the system operates like giant predator to a herd of sheep.

There are so many laws that single out the "weakling" in the herd, it frankly isn't funny. Everyday there are members of Our herd that are pulled down, and instead of being killed, these predators of govt. only take chunks out to eat. They literally suck the life's blood, or spirit out of these People. Putting them back into the herd after serious monetary damage to them; of course with threats should they tip off the rest of us.

S&F



posted on Sep, 29 2009 @ 09:02 PM
link   


The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.
--Ayn Rand


Good thread, thanks, star and flag for posting it.




TA


Mod Edit - Mod Note: One Line Post – Please Review This Link.


[edit on 29-9-2009 by elevatedone]



posted on Sep, 29 2009 @ 09:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready

Originally posted by buddhasystem
Too much hysteria in the OP. My wife is a lawyer and on many occasions she stated the importance of proven intent in prosecuting/defending the case. The link in the OP represents a few hiccups in the system for sure but these are far from a trend.


How about OJ? Found Not Guilty, still had to give up millions and all future earnings, and then get the maximum penalty for an admitted set-up! (He may be an azz and deserve it, but that doesn't make it ok to manipulate the law!)


A little clarification - as I remember it, OJ was found not guilty in the criminal case and guilty in the civil. There's a difference in the amount of evidence necessary - "Beyond a reasonable doubt" vs "a preponderance of the evidence."
It's basically a very high percentage vs 51%.

Would you mind U2U-ing me a link to the slot machine winning case you mentioned? I'd be interested in reading about that.

Here's a quote from novelist Ayn Rand. She's not at all my favorite write but I think the quote is appropriate to this conversation:


“There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one “makes” them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What’s there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted — and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on the guilt.”
– Ayn Rand, _Atlas Shrugged


[edit on 29-9-2009 by really]

[edit on 29-9-2009 by really]



posted on Sep, 29 2009 @ 09:16 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Sep, 29 2009 @ 11:03 PM
link   
reply to post by really
 


Either OJ was guilty or not. Why should the law be different for civil cases vs. criminal cases. If nothing else this is a violation of our basic rights, for god's sake, why do we have a double standard? Why should OJ be held accountable for something that he did not do. Wait, oh yeah, the civil court says he did it so he must pay. Wait, now we have a murderer on the streets walking free!

Either we are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt or we are not. Otherwise we have a paradox, just as we have in the OJ case.

I would like to know the 3 felonies I commit every day though. I wake up drive to my job, teach a while, then go eat lunch using a credit card to pay(no cash on me), then go somewhere to work on research before returning home where my wife has cooked me dinner. Then I watch a little mind mushing TV and return to bed to start again tomorrow. Can you provide examples?

I know our law is common and in many cases not written and I appreciate the examples GRA provided, but I believe these to be extreme and unusual cases, what we can call outliers in research. These cases will most likely be overturned in higher courts, or one would hope.

The real crime is that the government is not responsible for the legal costs associated with forcing someone to pay for an attorney for appeal. Why should we be bankrupted b/c the state made an obvious mistake and drastic violation of our basic human rights such as freedom and happiness!



posted on Sep, 29 2009 @ 11:19 PM
link   
reply to post by memarf1
 


Well, that's just the Common Law method which began in England. You don't have to agree with it. But, it's nothing new.
The reason there is two different trials is because the court wants to hold criminal trials to a higher standard. The jury has to be close to %100 belief that the person is guilty of the crime. This is to stop people being imprisoned unjustly.
While Civil cases are held to a much lower standard. As I said before, it's 51% or better. That's how you can find someone guilty in a civil case but not a criminal case.
Not saying that it's right or wrong, just that this is how it is.



posted on Sep, 29 2009 @ 11:46 PM
link   
reply to post by really
 


So instead of imprisoning their body we bankrupt them and ruin their lives. That makes sense, I mean why would we want to be 100% sure they were guilty to just take their livelihoods. Yeah sure, I'm "Pretty Sure" he did it, lets just take everything he has and I suppose we are justified because he is "Probably" guilty.

Outrageous, Egregious, Salacious! Completely Absurd!

[edit on 29-9-2009 by memarf1]



posted on Sep, 29 2009 @ 11:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by memarf1
reply to post by really
 


So instead of imprisoning their body we bankrupt them and ruin their lives. That makes sense, I mean why would we want to be 100% sure they were guilty to just take their livelihoods. Yeah sure, I'm "Pretty Sure" he did it, lets just take everything he has and I suppose we are justified because he is "Probably" guilty.

Outrageous, Egregious, Salacious! Completely Absurd!

[edit on 29-9-2009 by memarf1]


HA!!! I hear you Jackie Chiles (I'm a Seinfeld fan, too). Well, it's a human system of justice so..... probably won't be just at least half the time.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 12:33 AM
link   
some of our laws dont make sense




TextArkansas · Think twice while in Arkansas if you harbor an unflagging passion for cold cut sandwiches and honking your car horn. Arkansas authorities have deemed it illegal to blare a car horn where ice cold beverages or sandwiches are served after 9 p.m. ·

In Topeka, Kansas, it is unlawful to transport dead poultry along Kansas Avenue. Lesson: look elsewhere for a KFC. ·

Make sure your canine does not harbor a weird fetish for tailgate lights or trailer hitches while in Fort Thomas, Kentucky. You’ll be fined if your pet molests a vehicle. ·
If you are a horn-honking hooligan you better be carrying your vehicle’s bill of sale if you have the nerve to toot your horn while in University City, Missouri. Officials there have wisely made it illegal to honk the horn of someone else’s car. ·
In Oregon you need to be not only alert for state troopers with speed guns, but also with stop watches. For you can be ticketed if you leave your car door open longer than is deemed necessary. ·

In Scituate, Rhode Island, it is illegal to drive with beer in your vehicle even if it is unopened. So, in other words, if you’re a beer delivery driver you’re screwed.

Arkansas: The Little Rock parliament passed a law forbidding the Arkansas River to rise higher than the level of the Main Street Bridge.

In Mobile, pigeons are prohibited from eating the pebbles on composite roofs.
Anyone caught causing "unseemly laughter" by wearing a false moustache in church will be arrested.
It is forbidden for a man may beat his wife more than once a month

It is illegal to mispronounce the name of the state of Arkansas.

Alaska In Fairbanks, moose are forbidden from having sex on the city streets.
By law no child is allowed to build a snowman taller than himself within school grounds.

Connecticutt Nobody in Devon is allowed to walk backwards after sunset.
In Delaware it is illegal for a person to pawn his wooden leg.
In Hartford, it is illegal to kiss your wife on Sunday.

Illinois It is against the law to make faces at dogs.

Wearing pyjamas while fishing is prohibited in Chicago.
It is illegal to carry fish tackle into a cemetery in Muncie.

Massachusetts Tomatoes must not be put in clam chowder.
At a wake, mourners may eat no more than three sandwiches.

Snoring is prohibited unless all bedroom windows are closed and securely locked.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 10:31 AM
link   
Robert Anton Wilson, writing in the 1970's, was able to honestly inform his audience that sexual behavior alone had made them all criminals...

now in the intervening 30 plus years a few laws may have changed...

im from Missouri (USA) and when i was in high school in '85 we did a paper on things like this

i was stunned to learn that in my homestate...

"digital genital contact" was forbidden and illegal.

I got an A for pointing out that i could be arrested for "aiming" where "number one" was concerned...

my favorites tho are all the felonious acts of gardening one can perform...

It is possible to set up a nice little window box of BAD plants that will send you away for the rest of your life...

wonder what Tom Paine would say to that



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 11:04 AM
link   
reply to post by memarf1
 



I would like to know the 3 felonies I commit every day though.


OOOOO fun! I love to play "Name that Crime"!! You name an activity and I will name a crime! You drive to work everyday? Do you speed? There is one. If you don't speed, you must be obstructing traffic, there is one. Now, either way, when you get pulled over, the officer will ask, "Do you know why I pulled you over?" You say, NO. Lying to a police officer, obstructing an investigation, resisting arrest without violence. There are 3 new crimes. So the officer sees your NRA sticker and asks to search your car. Etc., Etc.!

Now, you eat lunch. Do you look at the women walking by? Menacing, Stalking, Assault. If you don't look at any of the women, then you are loitering and acting suspicious. (You are on FSU campus, so if you don't look, it is definitely suspicious!)

Lets see, studying in the library. Your degree was Physics, you still have NRA sticker, you are Christian, and you are on ATS. This makes you a very potential Domestic Terrorist. Remember MIB? That little girl with the Physics book in this neighborhood, she must be up to something!!

Now, your graduate studies are Economics. You are reading papers by plenty of political activists and forming opinions on current state of affairs. You are politically active yourself, and I saw you at a Tea Party on 09/12. So, your activities could land you in jail via the Patriot Act, without cause, or rights, or contact with an attorney. Your background and social groups will definitely keep you there, and as the investigation digs into your past, they will find plenty to lock you up for months to years, whether they ever decide to charge you or not!!

Now, don't fear yet! Because luckily there are not enough cops to take everyone to this extreme, but the laws are there. Secondly, I will gladly come get you out. You won't spend more than 30 days, and the Revolution will be afoot when you touch freeland!



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 11:13 AM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


What you posted is a potpourri of your beefs with the American legal system, which has little to do with the alleged focus of the OP. I'm not happy that OJ was let go etc, but this in itself had nothing to do with distortion of the English Common Law. Please.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 11:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready

Originally posted by buddhasystem
Too much hysteria in the OP. My wife is a lawyer and on many occasions she stated the importance of proven intent in prosecuting/defending the case. The link in the OP represents a few hiccups in the system for sure but these are far from a trend.


Tell that to Martha Stewart! Or any of the other people that have successfully beaten their cases only to have technicalities uncovered during the case drawn up and prosecuted with severe penalties!


You have your facts screwed up. Read about why she went to jail then come back to discus it.


How about OJ? Found Not Guilty, still had to give up millions and all future earnings, and then get the maximum penalty for an admitted set-up! (He may be an azz and deserve it, but that doesn't make it ok to manipulate the law!)


So, according to you, everyone that ever stole a bait-car, bought or sold drugs to an undercover, tried to hire an undercover as a hitman or tried to sell stolen property to an undercover should be let go because they were "set up" , right? All of those people, including Da Juice, willingly chose to knowingly break the law with their actions, regardless of the circumstances.


How about the guy in the ATS thread, found Not Guilty of transporting controlled substances, and then have a trumped up charge of abandoning his lab (while he was in jail, and the lab was secured) get him a 2 year sentence!


This is a gross misrepresentation of what happened.


How about the Florida man that was distributing perfectly legal porn, but is about to serve several years because a myriad of laws were combined and overlapped so that he violated decency standards, and then his other actions became crimes?


Another gross misrepresentation. That isn't even close to the actual Max Hardcore trials.


How about Rico statutes? Can't get them on one crime, get circumstantial evidence on a bunch of minor violations, package them up and invoke Rico!


Example?


How about thing like paraphenalia? Pipe not a crime. But combine it with another misdemeanor possession and it becomes a secondary crime!


Sudafed isn't illegal either, unless you're using it to create meth. Your computer is legal untill you use it to hack into Nasa. My car is legal untill I get behind the wheel drunk....... It isn't the object itself if said object has legal uses, it is what you are using it for that makes it illegal. Don't make these kind or ridiculous arguments if you want to be taken seriously.


How about a legally registered gun, in a legal car, with legal cash won at a casino. Now, when pulled over the overzealous cop violates your rights, trumps up suspicion, searches car, finds cash, continues illegal search, finds weapon, checks cash and like all other US cash it contains trace coc aine, then the gun becomes a felony (even though it was legal a second ago), then the cash and car become property of the state, and you are facing at least two felonies! Now it gets worse because you told the cop that you didn't have any drugs, so you have lied to a police officer, impeded an investigation, and resisted arrest! How about a life sentence for exercising your 2nd amendment and getting a little lucky on the slot machines!



Example? Or are you just making thigs up?

[edit on 30-9-2009 by Tiloke]



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 11:25 AM
link   
This is pretty much why I consider the statement "If you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to fear" to be preposterous.

We all commit crimes, sometimes without knowing it. Most of the time no one takes notice, the cops don't want to deal with the paper work for a jaywalking charge. If they were trying to get you for another reason yet didn't have enough proof they will get you on anything they can.

Sodomy was illegal in New York until fairly recently, it was defined as "Anything other than vaginal intercourse" and people were prosecuted for "Sodomy" quite often when there was no proof of another law being broken.

We all have something to fear from the government, if they want us, they'll find a way to get us.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 11:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Tiloke
 


Martha Stewart spent time for Perjury, not for the crime she was accused of! That is abuse of the law.

The Set-up with OJ I referred to was with him violently accosting the guys that stole his paraphenalia, not the police. They intentionally baited and provoked him with a camera present and the intent of extorting money from him. When he acted predictably, he was the one arrested. Sure, he was guilty, but I would probably have done the same thing in his shoes!

But, since you mentioned it, why is it a crime to lie to a police officer, but it is ok for a police officer to lie to you? Not just stretch the truth, but flat out lie! Say, "We have your fingerprints" when they don't! Or say, "Your wife is writing out her confession now" when she is not!

I wish I could find the link to the Alaska story, it was not misrepresented at all! He had all the proper licenses and lab and permits, but he failed to place one sticker on a package. For almost two years they tried to convict him of some outlandish crimes, but he was ultimately found not guilty by a jury. Then, they rearrested him for abandoning his lab for the time he was in jail, the lab stayed fully secured and permited, but they finally got that conviction, and he had to say goodbye to his crying granddaughter in a courtroom to go and serve two years in prison for a sticker? Maybe someone can find the story here on ATS for me.

Admittedly my last scenario was a made up example. It came to me as I was driving home from a Casino one night! I didn't get pulled over, but I did have a bunch of cash, no receipts proving I had one it (because I won a lot of small pots, not one big one), I had my gun, my NRA sticker, tinted windows, nice car, etc.! I was actually scared, even though I had done nothing wrong, I realized how easy it could be made to look very bad!



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 12:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Tiloke
 



How about Rico statutes? Can't get them on one crime, get circumstantial evidence on a bunch of minor violations, package them up and invoke Rico!

Example?


Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organization (RICO) statute n. a federal law which makes it a crime for organized criminal conspiracies to operate legitimate businesses.

legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...)+statut

Examples:
jada.ada.org...

www.thelaborers.net...


In a Georgia case, a defendant tried to argue that since the federal RICO act does not explicitly forbid participation in a legitimate corporation, it was insulated from liability under the Georgia RICO Act which saw federal case law as instructive in its interpretation. 109 The court in that case properly ruled that "the fact that [the defendant] was a legitimate corporation does not insulate it from RICO liability." 110 Federal case law contradicted the defendant's treatment of the issue. 111 Also, the Georgia statute specifically included "illicit as well as licit enterprises" as targets of RICO prosecution


There were plenty more, but the RICO statutes can be applied to legal activities by legit businesses, and can spread across multiple business that are not legally related in any way, but can be construed to be "related in fact" such as a group of businesses that have acted independently to adjust prices upward, even if they had no intimate contact or foreknowledge of the actions!!




top topics



 
12
<<   2 >>

log in

join